Feedback Please

Okay Political Nerds, give me feedback on the following proposal (It is a first draft)

Problem Statement:
The States’ representation on the Federal level of the US government was removed with the passage of the seventeenth amendment to the US Constitution. Thereby, removing “the double advantage of favoring a select appointment, and of giving to the State governments such an agency in the formation of the federal government as must secure the authority of the former, and may form a convenient link between the two systems.”
In the previous century, while the State legislatures lost their power over Senate appointments, they were granted influential power, exercised by the redistricting process, over the US House of Representatives during the Reapportionment Revolution of the 1960s. From the end of Reconstruction through 1960, there was an average of 40 seats gained or lost each election by each of the major two parties. This average fell to 16 in the elections from 1962 to 2004. Since the House’s expansion to 435 members and passage of the 17th amendment , the differential, comparative responsiveness between the House and Senate dropped from 3.43% until 1960 to .53% after 1960 . Partially due to political redistricting, the designed democratic responsive nature of the House has diminished.

Proposed Solution:
Amend the US Constitution, initiated by “a Convention for proposing Amendments” with the following :
Amendment XXVIII
Section 1. The seventeenth amendment of the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
Section 2. Should a State divide its Representatives by geographic boundaries, such boundaries are to be created and approved by a majority of an appointed group of persons within each State. This group, of an even number, is to be appointed, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, by the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.
Section 3. No State shall send a Representative to the House of Representatives if such Representative is not elected in accordance with this amendment.

Major Obstacles/Implementation Problems:
Constituent Objections:
Voters likely will respond negatively to the repeal of the constitutionally mandated direct election of Senators. However, the State Legislatures can individually establish this democratic process, as at least 29 states had done prior to the 17th amendment’s adoption. Therefore, they can pressure their state level governments for the reestablishment of the process.
Voters also likely will be wary of Section 3 fearing losing their representation in the US House. However, if their State Legislature cannot come to an agreement upon a successful group, the voters can punish their state legislature via election, which adds incentive for the legislature to come to an agreement.

Elected Official Objections:
US House Representatives will probably dislike the actions taken against political redistricting because it will reduce their electoral prospect certainty. However, by going through “a Convention for proposing Amendments”, the House of Representatives is bypassed in the amendment process.
US Senators will likely oppose the amendment because their constituency could change from the voters to the state legislators. While this is unlikely, because of the expected results from voters’ objections, it is a reduced concern because the Senate is also bypassed in the amendment process.
Senators and Representatives could politically pressure state legislators to oppose the Amendment and depress its prospects for passage. However, the state legislators, prominent political figures in their respective states, would most likely benefit from Section 2 as their chances for successfully challenging and winning a US House seat improve. Therefore curbing this pressure.

Implementation Problems
The largest implementation problem will likely be in the calling of the Convention, since this has never been done before. However, an agreeable procedure could be established through by deliberation of the Speakers of legislatures.